Quote:
Originally Posted by NoOne
The problem is you think results have somethign to do with development and they do not. it doesn't matter what the player does in AAA as long as he is rated for it. relative competition isn't even part of the equation, so why would including it in ratings be anything but less clear information for promotion?
i've had numerous prospects hit low-.100s and be fine at any tier you can name. it simply doesn't matter for development.
i do use ratings relative to mlb all the time, and i see no problem differentiating between players in rookie and short A. i'm not going to argue about smoke this was only brought up by you saying you couldnt' differentiate between the players... which isn't true for me, so i don't see how this is a valid argument when you brought it up as a reason for using relative ratings.
you think it works differently, that's our disagreement. i say it's a static minmum and they will develop well.. you think it's relative to current competition in that particular league... whatever floats your boat.
|
It absolutely plays a role. If players struggle, they will become unhappy and it will affect their development. This has been stated by the developers many versions ago as fact.
EDIT TO ADD:
Here it is straight from the manual under the CHALLENGE part of player development.